Why do similar scientific enterprises garner unequal public approbation? High energy physics attracted considerable attention in the late-twentieth-century United States, whereas condensed matter physics – which occupied the greater proportion of US physicists – remained little known to the public, despite its relevance to ubiquitous consumer technologies. This paper supplements existing accounts of this much remarked-upon prestige asymmetry by showing that popular emphasis on the mundane technological offshoots of condensed matter physics and its focus on human-scale phenomena have rendered it (...) more recondite than its better-known sibling field. News reports about high energy physics emphasize intellectual achievement; reporting on condensed matter physics focuses on technology. And whereas frontier-oriented rhetoric of high energy physics communicates ideals of human potential, discoveries that smack of the mundane highlight human limitations and fail to resonate with the widespread aspirational vision of science – a consequence I call “the purloined letter effect.”. (shrink)

Availability of external funding influences the viability and structure of scientific fields. In the 1980s, structural changes in the manner in which external funds became available started to have an impact on materials science and engineering in the United States. These changes colluded with the search for a disciplinary identity of this research field inside the university. The solutions that arose were intended to find a mediating structure between external demands and resources and disciplinary orientation. Interviews with seventeen scientists in (...) seven universities revealed the impact in local university settings. The rise of research centers as new organizational units in universities can be linked to two periods. In the 1960s, expensive instruments stimulated unit formation; in the 1980s, the increase in application-related funding forced new administrative ways. It is shown that organizational changes also have an impact on disciplinary identity as witnessed by a strong increase in interdisciplinary materials Ph.D.s awarded. (shrink)

Do immigrant faculty trained in American higher education institutions adopt the outlook and practices of native US scientists and engineers, or do they diverge from such practices? The modern science paradigm holds that location will not matter significantly and that immigrants in either place will converge to a common standard of scientific practice. Drawing upon 134 in-depth interviews, this paper compares the scientific practices of two groups of Indian immigrant faculty in science and engineering: those who studied and worked in (...) the United States and then returned to India and those who continued to work in the United States. This paper shows that the two groups differed in important ways: ease of securing grants, management of grants, research environment, professional autonomy, and research type. (shrink)

Accounts of change in contemporary research in industry and the academy often note the increasing coexistence of market and academic norms and practices. This article suggests that, at least in industry, these conflicting norms and practices are often preserved by loose coupling between market pressures and the research organization. Based on a two-year case study, this article examines the imposition of tight coupling at an industry lab that had previously been able to maintain some of the norms and practices associated (...) with the academy. Tight market coupling limited the role of judgment in the governance of research. First, a market-based quantitative project selection system delegitimized expert judgment. As a result, projects with obvious market and technical uncertainties were more difficult to justify. Second, objective, market-based oversight also limited the role of expert judgment. Tracking the return on investment of scientists’ hours with time cards had the effect of discouraging time spent on learning or exploratory work. In many cases, researchers argued that displacement of judgment for a quantitative governance system caused work to shift away from research and toward product development. (shrink)

The tenure system exists in most public and private universities and 4-year public colleges in the United States. The American Association of University Professors has argued that tenure provides the most reliable means of assuring academic freedom, faculty quality, and educational excellence. However, budgetary constraints and the end of mandatory retirement in the ’90s have resulted in questioning the merits of the tenure system. It is argued that tenure entrenches a lazy professoriate, encourages the creation of temporary faculty positions, and (...) supports research over teaching. This article examines the tenure system as practiced in engineering institutions in the United States because engineering faculty serve as an interesting case study of 21st-century technology and 19th-century values. It illuminates issues underlying the tenure system beyond the traditional justification of academic freedom. (shrink)